Riley Julia, Branford Ruth, Droney Joanne, Gretton Sophy, Sato Hiroe, Kennett Alison, Oyebode Christina, Thick Michael, Wells Athol, Williams John, Welsh Ken, Ross Joy
Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom; National Heart & Lung Institute, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.
Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom; National Heart & Lung Institute, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom; St. Joseph's Hospice, London, United Kingdom.
J Pain Symptom Manage. 2015 Feb;49(2):161-72. doi: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2014.05.021. Epub 2014 Jun 26.
There is wide interindividual variation in response to morphine for cancer-related pain; 30% of patients do not have a good therapeutic outcome. Alternative opioids such as oxycodone are increasingly being used, and opioid switching has become common clinical practice.
To compare clinical response to oral morphine vs. oral oxycodone when used as first-line or second-line (after switching) treatment in patients with cancer-related pain.
In this prospective, open-label, randomized, controlled trial (ISRCTN65155201) with a selected crossover phase, patients with cancer-related pain were randomized to receive either oral morphine or oxycodone as first-line treatment. Dose was individually titrated until the patient reported adequate pain control. Patients who did not respond to the first-line opioid (either because of inadequate analgesia or unacceptable adverse effects) were switched to the alternative opioid.
Two hundred patients were recruited. On intention-to-treat analysis (n = 198, morphine 98, oxycodone 100), there was no significant difference between the numbers of patients responding to morphine (61/98 = 62%) or oxycodone (67/100 = 67%) when used as a first-line opioid. Similarly, there was no significant difference in subsequent response when patients were switched to either morphine (8/12 = 67%) or oxycodone (11/21 = 52%). Per-protocol analysis demonstrated a 95% response rate when both opioids were available. There was no difference in adverse reaction scores between morphine and oxycodone either in first-line responders or nonresponders.
In this population, there was no difference between analgesic response or adverse reactions to oral morphine and oxycodone when used as a first- or second-line opioid. These data provide evidence to support opioid switching to improve outcomes.
癌症相关疼痛患者对吗啡的反应存在广泛的个体差异;30%的患者治疗效果不佳。诸如羟考酮等替代阿片类药物的使用越来越多,阿片类药物转换已成为常见的临床实践。
比较口服吗啡与口服羟考酮在癌症相关疼痛患者中作为一线治疗或二线治疗(转换后)时的临床反应。
在这项具有选定交叉阶段的前瞻性、开放标签、随机对照试验(ISRCTN65155201)中,癌症相关疼痛患者被随机分配接受口服吗啡或羟考酮作为一线治疗。剂量根据个体情况进行滴定,直至患者报告疼痛得到充分控制。对一线阿片类药物无反应的患者(由于镇痛不足或不良反应不可接受)改用替代阿片类药物。
招募了200名患者。在意向性分析(n = 198,吗啡组98例,羟考酮组100例)中,作为一线阿片类药物使用时,对吗啡有反应的患者数量(61/98 = 62%)与对羟考酮有反应的患者数量(67/100 = 67%)之间无显著差异。同样,当患者改用吗啡(8/12 = 67%)或羟考酮(11/21 = 52%)时,后续反应也无显著差异。符合方案分析显示,两种阿片类药物均可用时的反应率为95%。一线有反应者或无反应者中,吗啡和羟考酮的不良反应评分无差异。
在该人群中,口服吗啡和羟考酮作为一线或二线阿片类药物使用时,镇痛反应或不良反应无差异。这些数据为支持阿片类药物转换以改善治疗效果提供了证据。